Derazantinib alone and with atezolizumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma with activating FGFR aberrations.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b/2 study assessed the efficacy in terms of objective response rate (ORR) of the FGFR1/2/3 kinase inhibitor derazantinib as monotherapy or in combination with atezolizumab in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) and FGFR1-3 genetic aberrations (FGFR1-3GA). METHODS: This multicenter, open-label study comprised 5 substudies. In Substudies 1 and 5, patients with mUC with FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib monotherapy (300 mg QD in Substudy 1, 200 mg BID in Substudy 5). In Substudy 2, patients with any solid tumor received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks plus derazantinib 200 or 300 mg QD. In Substudy 3, patients with mUC harboring FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib 200 mg BID plus atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks. In Substudy 4, patients with FGFR inhibitor-resistant mUC harboring FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib 300 mg QD monotherapy or derazantinib 300 mg QD plus atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The ORR for Substudies 1 and 5 combined was 4/49 (8.2%, 95% confidence interval = 2.3% to 19.6%), which was based on 4 partial responses. The ORR in Substudy 4 was 1/7 (14.3%, 95% confidence interval = 0.4% to 57.9%; 1 partial response for derazantinib 300 mg monotherapy, zero for derazantinib 300 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg). In Substudy 2, derazantinib 300 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg was identified as a recommended dose for Phase 2. Only 2 patients entered Substudy 3. CONCLUSIONS: Derazantinib as monotherapy or in combination with atezolizumab was well-tolerated but did not show sufficient efficacy to warrant further development in mUC. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04045613, EudraCT 2019-000359-15.

First-in-human phase Ib trial of M9241 (NHS-IL12) plus avelumab in patients with advanced solid tumors, including dose expansion in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In preclinical studies, combining M9241 (a novel immunocytokine containing interleukin (IL)-12 heterodimers) with avelumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody) resulted in additive or synergistic antitumor effects. We report dose-escalation and dose-expansion results from the phase Ib JAVELIN IL-12 trial investigating M9241 plus avelumab. METHODS: In the dose-escalation part of JAVELIN IL-12 (NCT02994953), eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors; in the dose-expansion part, eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) that had progressed with first-line therapy. Patients received M9241 at 4, 8, 12, or 16.8 µg/kg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W, dose levels (DLs) 1-4) or M9241 16.8 µg/kg Q4W plus avelumab 800 mg once a week for 12 weeks followed by Q2W (DL5/dose expansion). Primary endpoints for the dose-escalation part were adverse events (AEs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and those for the dose-expansion part were confirmed best overall response (BOR) per investigator (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1) and safety. The dose-expansion part followed a two-stage design; 16 patients were enrolled and treated in stage 1 (single-arm part). A futility analysis based on BOR was planned to determine whether stage 2 (randomized controlled part) would be initiated. RESULTS: At data cut-off, 36 patients had received M9241 plus avelumab in the dose-escalation part. All DLs were well tolerated; one DLT occurred at DL3 (grade 3 autoimmune hepatitis). The maximum-tolerated dose was not reached, and DL5 was declared the recommended phase II dose, considering an observed drug-drug interaction at DL4. Two patients with advanced bladder cancer (DL2 and DL4) had prolonged complete responses. In the dose-expansion part, no objective responses were recorded in the 16 patients with advanced UC; the study failed to meet the criterion (≥3 confirmed objective responses) to initiate stage 2. Any-grade treatment-related AEs occurred in 15 patients (93.8%), including grade ≥3 in 8 (50.0%); no treatment-related deaths occurred. Exposures for avelumab and M9241 concentrations were within expected ranges. CONCLUSIONS: M9241 plus avelumab was well tolerated at all DLs, including the dose-expansion part, with no new safety signals. However, the dose-expansion part did not meet the predefined efficacy criterion to proceed to stage 2.

Antitumor immunity induced by antibody-based natural killer cell engager therapeutics armed with not-alpha IL-2 variant.

Harnessing innate immunity is emerging as a promising therapeutic approach in cancer. We report here the design of tetraspecific molecules engaging natural killer (NK) cell-activating receptors NKp46 and CD16a, the ß-chain of the interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R), and a tumor-associated antigen (TAA). In vitro, these tetraspecific antibody-based natural killer cell engager therapeutics (ANKETs) induce a preferential activation and proliferation of NK cells, and the binding to the targeted TAA triggers NK cell cytotoxicity and cytokine and chemokine production. In vivo, tetraspecific ANKETs induce NK cell proliferation and their accumulation at the tumor bed, as well as the control of local and disseminated tumors. Treatment of non-human primates with CD20-directed tetraspecific ANKET leads to CD20+ circulating B cell depletion, with minimal systemic cytokine release and no sign of toxicity. Tetraspecific ANKETs, thus, constitute a technological platform for harnessing NK cells as next-generation cancer immunotherapies.

Adaptive dosing of sunitinib in a metastatic renal cell carcinoma patient: when in silico modeling helps to go quicker to the point.

PURPOSE: Adaptive dosing strategy with oral targeted therapies in oncology is mostly based upon clinical signs. Using pharmacokinetics (PK) models to customize dosing could help saving time, i.e., by predicting clinical outcome through early monitoring of drug levels. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a metastatic renal cell carcinoma patient treated with standard Sunitinib dosing (i.e., 50 mg QD). Clinical signs suggested lack of efficacy. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) confirmed that exposure was below the expected target exposure. PK modeling suggested that dosing could be increased safely to 75 mg QD. Sunitinib dosing was instead changed empirically to 62.5 mg only, increasing drug exposure to the lower part of the therapeutic window. Resolution of bone pains plus Stable Disease were observed. Even though further modeling suggested to increase Sunitinib dosing to 75 mg again, the intermediate dosing was maintained for the subsequent cycles to preserve the safety. Unfortunately, severe pains plus degradation of the general state were reported and imaging showed Progressive Disease. The patient was finally switched to alternative therapy, without being treated at the 75 mg level of Suntitinib. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION: This case suggests that model-based adaptive dosing could have allowed to reach quicker the best dosing with Sunitinib, thus possibly ensuring a better management of this patient. Model-informed dosing should be used instead of empirical search for the most appropriate dosing to ensure a good benefit/risk ratio with Sunitinib, especially in the context of such aggressive disease.

TAXOMET: A French Prospective Multicentric Randomized Phase II Study of Docetaxel Plus Metformin Versus Docetaxel Plus Placebo in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DOCE) is a standard of care in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Several retrospective studies suggested a decrease in Prostate Cancer incidence and mortality with metformin (MET). MET has also demonstrated anti-tumor activity in Prostate Cancer preclinical models, with increased apoptosis when added to DOCE. We aimed at exploring the role of MET in combination with DOCE in mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Non-diabetic mCRPC patients were randomly assigned to receive DOCE 75 mg/m2 every 21 days + prednisone (5 mg. BID) with either MET 850 mg BID (D+M) or placebo (D+P) up to 10 cycles. Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) response ≥50% from baseline was the primary end point. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: Out of 99 patients were randomized (D+M = 50; D+P = 49) in 10 French centers. The median follow-up was 86 (IQR 73-88) months. The PSA-response rate reached 66% in the D+M arm, but was not different from that observed in the D+P arm (63%, P = 0,94). In the D+M and D+P arms, the ORR was 28% and 24%, the median PFS was 7.8 and 6.0 months and the median OS was 27 and 20 months (ns), respectively. Diarrhea grade I to II was more frequent in the MET arm (66% vs. 43%). No impairment of QoL was observed. CONCLUSION: MET addition failed to improve the standard DOCE regimen in mCRPC. Further research targeting tumor cell metabolism should be performed.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Frail Patients with Primary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Preliminary Results after 4 Years of Experience.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to report the oncological outcomes and toxicity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to treat primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in frail patients unfit for surgery or standard alternative ablative therapies. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 23 patients who had SBRT for primary, biopsy-proven RCC at our tertiary center between October 2016 and March 2020. Treatment-related toxicities were defined using CTCAE, version 4.0. The primary outcome was local control which was defined using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. RESULTS: The median age, Charlson score and tumor size were 81 (IQR 79-85) years, 7 (IQR 5-8) and 40 (IQR 28-48) mm, respectively. The most used dose fractionation schedule was 35 Gy (78.3%) in five or seven fractions. The median duration of follow-up for all living patients was 22 (IQR 10-39) months. Local recurrence-free survival, event-free survival, cancer-specific survival and overall survival were 96 (22/23), 74 (18/23), 96 (22/23) and 83% (19/23), respectively. There were no grade 3-4 side effects. No patients required dialysis during the study period. No treatment-related deaths or late complications were reported. CONCLUSION: SBRT appears to be a promising alternative to surgery or ablative therapy to treat primary RCC in frail patients.

Clinical-Based vs. Model-Based Adaptive Dosing Strategy: Retrospective Comparison in Real-World mRCC Patients Treated with Sunitinib.

Different target exposures with sunitinib have been proposed in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, such as trough concentrations or AUCs. However, most of the time, rather than therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), clinical evidence is preferred to tailor dosing, i.e., by reducing the dose when treatment-related toxicities show, or increasing dosing if no signs of efficacy are observed. Here, we compared such empirical dose adjustment of sunitinib in mRCC patients, with the parallel dosing proposals of a PK/PD model with TDM support. In 31 evaluable patients treated with sunitinib, 53.8% had an empirical change in dosing after treatment started (i.e., 46.2% decrease in dosing, 7.6% increase in dosing). Clinical benefit was observed in 54.1% patients, including 8.3% with complete response. Overall, 58.1% of patients experienced treatment discontinuation eventually, either because of toxicities or progressive disease. When choosing 50-100 ng/mL trough concentrations as a target exposure (i.e., sunitinib + active metabolite N-desethyl sunitinib), 45% patients were adequately exposed. When considering 1200-2150 ng/mL.h as a target AUC (i.e., sunitinib + active metabolite N-desethyl sunitinib), only 26% patients were in the desired therapeutic window. TDM with retrospective PK/PD modeling would have suggested decreasing sunitinib dosing in a much larger number of patients as compared with empirical dose adjustment. Indeed, when using target trough concentrations, the model proposed reducing dosing for 61% patients, and up to 84% patients based upon target AUC. Conversely, the model proposed increasing dosing in 9.7% of patients when using target trough concentrations and in 6.5% patients when using target AUC. Overall, TDM with adaptive dosing would have led to tailoring sunitinib dosing in a larger number of patients (i.e., 53.8% vs. 71-91%, depending on the chosen metrics for target exposure) than a clinical-based decision. Interestingly, sunitinib dosing was empirically reduced in 41% patients who displayed early-onset severe toxicities, whereas model-based recommendations would have immediately proposed to reduce dosing in more than 80% of those patients. This observation suggests that early treatment-related toxicities could have been partly avoided using prospective PK/PD modeling with adaptive dosing. Conversely, the possible impact of model-based adapted dosing on efficacy could not be fully evaluated because no clear relationship was found between baseline exposure levels and sunitinib efficacy measured at 3 months.

Prognostic Value of the B12/CRP Index in Older Systemically Treatable Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: While comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in older patients treated for cancer assesses several related domains, it does not include standardized biological tests. The present study aimed to: (1) assess the prognosis value of the B12/CRP index (BCI) in a population of systemically treatable older patients with cancer and (2) analyze the association between BCI value and pre-existing geriatric frailty. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective observational study between January 2016 and June 2020 at Marseille University Hospital. All consecutive cancer patients aged 70 years and over before initiating systemic therapy were included. RESULTS: Of the 863 patients included, 60.5% were men and 42.5% had metastatic stage cancer. Mean age was 81 years. The low-BCI group (≤10,000) had a significantly longer survival time than the mid-BCI (10,000 < BCI ≤ 40,000) and high-BCI (BCI > 40,000) groups (HR = 0.327, CI95% [0.26-0.42], p-value = 0.0001). Mid- and high-BCI (BCI > 40,000) values were associated with impaired functional status and malnutrition. CONCLUSION: A BCI > 10,000 would appear to be a good biological prognostic factor for poor survival times and pre-existing geriatric impairment in older cancer patients before they initiate systemic treatment.

Medication Reconciliation Associated with Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in Older Patients with Cancer: ChimioAge Study.

BACKGROUND: Polymorbidity induces polypharmacy in older patients may lead to potential drug-drug interactions (DDI) which can modify the tolerance and safety of oncological treatments and alter the intended therapeutic effect. The objective of our study was to describe the decision-making process for oncological treatment and related outcomes, in a population of older adults undergoing a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) associated to a comprehensive medication reconciliation (CMR) prior to initiating oncological treatment. METHODS: ChimioAge is a prospective observational study conducted between 01/2017 and 07/2018 at Marseille University Hospital and approved by the French National Ethics Committee. It comprised all consecutive patients aged 70 years and over who were referred for a CGA as part of CMR, before initiating systemic treatment. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-one cancer patients were included. Mean age was 79.2 years, over half had metastatic cancers, 75% had an ECOG performance status zero or one, and two-thirds were independent in daily activities. Two-thirds of the patients had polypharmacy and the CMR identified potential DDI with systemic treatment in 43.3% of patients. Following the CGA, the CMR and the hospital oncologists decision, 30% of the patients received adapted systemic treatment with reduced doses at initiation. They presented fewer toxicities - irrespective of grade and type - than patients who received standard treatment (p<0.001) and had comparable overall survival (Log rank p=0.21). CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies to highlight the value in conducting CMR and a CGA simultaneously before initiating systemic treatment in older patients with cancer. These two evaluations could give oncologists decisive information to personalize cancer treatment of older patients and optimize treatment dose to offer the best efficacy and minimize toxicity.

A simple and rapid liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method to assay cabozantinib in plasma: Application to therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Cabozantinib is a novel multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor recently approved in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) leading to frequent severe toxicities requiring empirical dose reduction. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could help to predict the risk for severe toxicities by quickly detecting overexposed patients followed by prospective adaptive dosing strategy. To achieve this goal, a simple and rapid assay to monitor cabozantinib plasma concentration was developed and validated. After a single precipitation step with 87% recovery, cabozantinib was assayed by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (electrospray ionization interface) over a 25-5000 ng/ml range covering usual plasma levels in clinical setting. For cabozantinib and cabozantinib 2H4 used as internal standard, quantification was performed using the m/z 502 â†’ m/z 323 and m/z 506 â†’ m/z 323 transitions, respectively. Analytical runtime was 5 min. Both inter-days and intra-day accuracy and precision were <15%. When tested in routine clinical practice in a subset of mRCC patients treated with standard 60 mg quaque die (QD) dosing, the method proved to be fully adapted and neither analytical interferences nor matrix effect was observed. Results showed that cabozantinib trough levels were highly variable among patients (i.e., 973 ± 501 ng/ml, CV = 52%), calling for implementing TDM in patients with mRCC to monitor exposure levels and evaluate concentration-response relationship.

"Real-world" evaluation of 18F-Choline PET/CT practices in prostate cancer patients and impact on changes in therapeutic strategy.

OBJECTIVES: The role of 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-Choline PET/CT) in different clinical situations remains controversial and current practices are very heterogeneous. The aim of this study was to evaluate the "real-world" practice of 18F-Choline PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer and its potential impacts on therapeutic strategy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This is a retrospective multicenter observational study including 265 consecutive men who underwent 18F-Choline PET/CT for prostate cancer between November 2014 and November 2015. Primary outcome was impact on therapeutic strategy. Secondary outcomes were sensitivity of the 18F-Choline PET/CT and predictive factors associated with positive scans. Statistical analyses comprised Student's t test for continuous variables or chi-squared test for qualitative variables. RESULTS: Median PSA level at the time of PET/CT was 4.19 ng/ml. The decision to perform PET/CT was made after multidisciplinary discussion in 29.8% of cases; most were prescribed by urologists (50.2% of cases). Three main indications were concerned: biochemical recurrence after local treatment (61.1%), initial staging (26.0%), or at the time of progression to castration-resistance (12.9%). Upon biochemical recurrence, 18F-Choline PET/CT allowed identification of ≥1 site(s) with a sensitivity of 80.9%. In multivariate analysis, predictive factors associated with 18F-Choline PET/CT sensitivity were serum PSA level and local treatment type in cases of biochemical recurrence, and PSA doubling time and Gleason score in case of initial staging. 18F-Choline PET/CT results allowed restaging and change in therapeutic strategy in 58.1% of all combined indications. CONCLUSIONS: Indications of 18F-Choline PET/CT were varied. The detection rate of metastatic lesions was suitable, especially when PSA rate was >1 ng/mL. In most cases, 18F-Choline PET/CT led to a change in therapeutic strategy, particularly in the setting of biochemical recurrence.

Clinical progression is associated with poor prognosis whatever the treatment line in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer: The CATS international database.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Our goal was to evaluate the impact of progression type (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] only, radiological or clinical) at initiation of first-, second- and third life-extending therapy (LET) on treatment outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, by performing a post-hoc analysis using data from the CATS international registry. METHODS: The 669 consecutive mCRPC patients of the CATS registry were classified according to their type of progression at initiation of each LET: PSA only (PSA-p), radiological (±PSA) (Radio-p); or clinical (±PSA, ±radiological) progression (Clin-p). Overall survival (OS), the primary endpoint, was calculated from initiation of the first-, second- and third-LET to death for each sequence. RESULTS: Median OS was shorter in the Clin-p group compared with the PSA-p group (14-month difference in first line; around 7-month difference in second- and third line). Shorter progression-free survival (PFS) was also observed in Clin-p patients, whatever the treatment is. Clinical progression seemed to be associated with a shorter duration of therapy with androgen receptor-targeted therapy (ART) compared with taxanes. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical progression at initiation of a LET is associated with poor outcomes including shorter PFS and OS as well as clinical and biological features of aggressive disease. Stratifying patients in clinical trials according to disease progression type may prevent selection bias and data heterogeneity. In daily practice, first signs of clinical progression may prompt physicians to consider starting a new LET, independently of PSA levels.

Rechallenge of carboplatin-gemcitabine based chemotherapy for rapidly progressing metastatic collecting duct carcinoma of the kidney leading to a delayed and durable complete response: A case report.

Renal collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) is a rare and highly aggressive subtype of kidney cancer with poor prognosis. We report a case of one patient, who was successfully treated with gemcitabine-platin based chemotherapy for polymetastatic renal CDC, and experienced a late and prolonged complete remission. In June 2014, a 69-year-old male patient was diagnosed with non-metastatic renal CDC. Nephrouretectomy was firstly performed. In December 2014, he developed a loco-regional recurrence with bilateral lung metastases. The patient started a course of gemcitabine-carboplatin (GC)-based first-line chemotherapy and received 6 cycles, which ended in May 2015. Computed tomography (CT) scan evaluation displayed an objective response according to RECIST 1.1 criteria and a follow-up of the patient was conducted. In August 2015, he had a second local relapse with new lung metastases. Despite a short disease-free interval, 6 cycles of the same GC regimen were required, which ended in February 2016. The patient firstly exhibited a partial objective response after the first 3 cycles and a stable disease at the end of chemotherapy. During the follow-up, a CT scan of his chest, abdomen and pelvis was performed every 3 months. From September 2016 to May 2017, despite no new specific treatments for his metastatic disease, the patient again experienced an objective and confirmed response on each CT-scan evaluation until complete remission in May 2017. This case report highlights the efficacy of GC-based chemotherapy, which is able to provide a durable and sometimes complete response in metastatic renal CDC, and suggests the potential of rechallenging with the same chemotherapy regimen, despite a short disease-free interval. The originality of this case was demonstrated by the delayed complete response more than one year after the end of GC-based second line chemotherapy. The patient remained disease-free at his last CT-scan evaluation in April 2018.

Efficacy of cabazitaxel rechallenge in heavily treated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment option in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel (DOC), cabazitaxel (CABA) and new hormone therapy (NHT) is limited. Rechallenge with DOC is limited because of cumulative toxicities. This study investigated the activity and safety of CABA rechallenge in mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data were collected retrospectively in 17 centres in Europe. Eligible patients had undergone rechallenge with cabazitaxel after three previous lines of treatment (DOC, NHT and CABA, in any order). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Data on toxicities were collected. RESULTS: A total of 69 of 562 patients (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 69%) were rechallenged with CABA (25 mg/m2 q3w, 58%; 20 mg/m2 q3w, 27.5%; other, 14.5%) for 1-10 (median 6) cycles; 76.8% received prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. Median radiological or clinical PFS with CABA rechallenge was 7.8 months and 11.9 months with initial CABA therapy. OS was 13.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.3-15.7) from the first CABA rechallenge cycle, 59.9 months (47.8-67.1) from the first life-extending therapy in mCRPC and 78.3 months (66.4-90.7) from mCRPC diagnosis. Best clinical benefit was improved (34.3%) or stable (47.8%). Lack of response to rechallenge occurred in 17.9% of patients (3.1% with initial CABA). The level of prostate-specific antigen decreased by ≥ 50% in 24% of patients at rechallenge (71% with initial CABA). There was no grade ≥III peripheral neuropathy or nail disorders. CONCLUSIONS: CABA rechallenge may be a treatment option without cumulative toxicity in heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC who are still fit and had a progression >3 months after the last CABA injections.

Acute myositis: an unusual and severe side effect of docetaxel: a case report and literature review.

Docetaxel is an antimicrotubules cytotoxic agent prescribed widely by medical oncologists in multiple tumor types (breast, lung, prostate, stomach, head, and neck). However, the side effects of docetaxel are numerous (cytopenia, peripheral edema, myalgia, arthralgia, alopecia, and sensitive neuropathy) and recent concerns have been raised about neutropenic enterocolitis in France. Here, we report the case of a 57-year-old patient with metastatic prostatic cancer, who developed a severe myositis and fasciitis grade IV 1 week after his second docetaxel infusion. We reviewed the five cases of docetaxel-related myositis described in the literature, and found that most of them occurred in patients with diabetes (n=5/5) or hypertension (n=4/5). A vascular toxicity may explain this severe complication, and patients with diabetes or hypertension should be monitored closely in the context of a docetaxel chemotherapy.

Sequencing of Taxanes and New Androgen-targeted Therapies in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Results of the International Multicentre Retrospective CATS Database.

BACKGROUND: The optimal sequence of life-extending therapies in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes among mCRPC patients treated with docetaxel (DOC), cabazitaxel (CABA), and a novel androgen receptor-targeted agent (ART; abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide) according to three different sequences. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from 669 consecutive mCRPC patients were retrospectively collected between November 2012 and October 2016. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (decrease ≥50% from baseline) to each therapy. Secondary endpoints included best clinical benefit, time to PSA progression, radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 158 patients received DOC→CABA→ART (group 1), 456 received DOC→ART→CABA (group 2), and 55 received ART→DOC→CABA (group 3). At baseline, PSA progression only and Gleason <8 were more common in group 3. PSA response on DOC was lower in group 3 than in other groups (p=0.02) and PSA response on CABA was higher in the second than in the third line (p=0.001). In Group 3, rPFS on ART (6.6 mo) and DOC (9.2 mo) was also shorter than in the other groups. OS calculated from the first life-extending therapy reached 34.8, 35.8, and 28.9 mo in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively (p=0.007). Toxicity was comparable between the arms. The main limitations of the trial are its retrospective design and the low number of patients in group 3. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective trial, sequencing of DOC, CABA, and one ART, was associated with median OS of up to 35.8 mo. CABA seemed to retain its activity regardless of treatment sequence. DOC activity after ART appeared to be reduced, but the data are insufficient to conclude that cross-resistance occurs. PATIENT SUMMARY: The order of drugs administered to patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer could impact their efficacy, with cabazitaxel appearing to retain its activity whatever the therapeutic sequence.

Clinical activity of sunitinib rechallenge in metastatic renal cell carcinoma-Results of the REchallenge with SUnitinib in MEtastatic RCC (RESUME) Study.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib rechallenge in the third-line or later setting in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This observational study comprised 61 mRCC patients at 19 centres in France who received sunitinib rechallenge between January 2006 and May 2013. Patients received first-line sunitinib, ≥1 different targeted therapies, and then sunitinib rechallenge. Patient/disease characteristics, tolerability, treatment modalities, and outcomes of therapeutic lines were recorded. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) in sunitinib rechallenge. RESULTS: Analyses included 52 patients; median age was 59 years, 75% were male, and 98% had clear-cell mRCC and prior nephrectomy. At sunitinib rechallenge versus first-line, patients had poorer performance (Karnofsky performance status 90-100: 30% versus 81%) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre prognostic risk (poor risk: 18% versus 3%). Overall, 20%, 65%, 12%, and 4% received sunitinib rechallenge as third-, fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-line therapy, respectively, at 14.6 months (median) after stopping initial treatment. With first-line sunitinib and rechallenge, median PFS was 18.4 and 7.9 months, respectively; objective response rate was 54% and 15%. Two of eight rechallenge responders had not achieved first-line response. Median overall survival was 55.9 months. The sunitinib rechallenge safety profile was as expected, with no new adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib rechallenge is a feasible treatment option with potential clinical benefit for mRCC patients. Disease progression with first-line sunitinib may not be associated with complete or irreversible resistance to therapy.